Introduction

Background

Papermaking was invented around105, when Ts'ai Lun, an official attached to the Imperial court of China, created a sheet of paper using mulberry and other bast fibres along with fishnets, old rags, and hemp waste.

Cyanotype was invented by Sir John Herschel the astronomer in 1842. The cyanotype process was invented one year after the introduction of the Daguerreotype, the first photographic process. It is one of photography's oldest techniques and also the most permanent. The blue image is actually an iron stain that will not fade or wash away. Much maligned and little appreciated in earlier days when it was used chiefly as an inexpensive means of reproduction contemporary photographers now realize its potential as an art form.

For background on the Digital Negative process visit Nathan Bess and Thomas Stimpson's site. WE NEED LINK ON (NATHAN BESS AND THOMAS STIMPSON'S SITE).

Procedure

1. Take pictures with camera using black and white film. The film should be 35mm with a speed of 400.

 

2. Take pictures of desired images and then take them to be developed from a1 hour developing place.

 

3. Using a Umax VitaScan scanner, scan the pictures that you want to develop.

 

4. Using Adobe PhotoShop, Invert image. You can do this be either hitting "open Apple Key" and "I", or go under the Image menu > Adjust >Invert.

 

5. Print image onto transparency paper using and ink-jet printer. **Make sure transparency paper is for ink-jet printers and not laser jet printers.

1. Acquire different types of pulp. The first being 400 mL of Pine fiber and the second being 300 mL of cotton. **difference in mL’s is because of consistency and thickness

 

2. Pour pulp into deckle box, add 5 drops of sizing and stir the solution.

 

3. Turn nozzle to drain water from box.

 

4. Remove flattened pulp from mold onto a piece of pellon.

 

5. Place another pellon on it and then a piece of felt on top of that.

 

6. Roll 2-liter bottle over paper to flatten the paper.

 

7. Place paper onto drying board.

1. Acquire cyanotype solution and a sponge brush.

 

2. Dip the brush into the cyanotype solution and spread it over the surface of your paper. ** Be sure not to apply too much cyanotype solution to it. Also be sure to label each piece of paper.

 

3. Dry each piece of paper and make sure they are not exposed to light.

1. Place 2 pieces of paper on a UV Light Box with the cyanotype side down. The transparencies must be between the paper and the box so that the image will be shown on the paper.

 

2. Turn box on for 7 minutes.

 

3. Repeat last two steps another time.

 

4. Take transparencies and place them on paper touching the cyanotype side.

 

5. Place two pieces of glass on either side of the paper and transparency and clip clothes line pins around the edge of glass.

 

6. Place the glass pieces in the sun with the cyanotype side up.

 

7. Allow to sit in the sun for 7 minutes

 

8. Repeat last three steps again, so that rest of paper is exposed.

1. Obtain three developing tubs and fill each with water.

 

2. Let each piece of paper sit in each bath for two minutes.

Dry paper by hanging

Observations and Data

Of the two images we produced, only one could be called a success. The image of the river contained to little contrast, or two much depending on how you look at it. Since the majority of the surrounding area around the river was covered by shadows the detail is not visible in the picture. When creating our negatives we should have played with the contrast of that particular negative more.

Sunlight:

Cotton: The texture of the paper added an unexpected surprise. The texture is so rough and uneven that when we applied the solution, even with sponge brushes, it did not penetrate to all of the crevices in the paper. The result is that in each image white spots are visible where the paper was not coated. This produced our best image of the river. The texture allowed for the lightness of the foreground to be more effectively represented. On the image of the river the cyanotype solution bled into the paper during developing. This suggests that the sizing was not adequately dispersed in the paper. The bleeding occurred in the lower right hand corner of the sheet. This could have been avoided by constantly changing the water.

Pine: Since the pine is a much smoother paper that the cotton the texture allowed for more detail. With both images the image is a bit more recognizable. The barn image has three odd white spots in the middle of some of the darkest color. These spots indicate that either the paper was not coated in those areas, or that the glass covering the negative was dirty, it seems the later more reasonable. In the barn image the texture of the wood planks is even visible. The darkest color is darker that any in the cotton paper. This may be because the pine absorbed the solution better that the cotton. During developing the pine would also become saturated with water. This suggests that either more sizing is needed, or that the pine is a more absorbent paper. Once again we believe the later to be true.

UV Emitter:

Cotton: The image of the barn is a mirror image of the rest; this occurred because the negative was placed upside down. There is not much difference in the coloration or saturation of color between this and the sun exposed. The river image seems to have more foreground lightness, similar to the other image exposed by the sun, which make me think that the paper is causing it and not the light source. The background of the barn image is lighter than any of its counterparts. This suggests that it was not either coated well enough, or that the light was not as harsh as the sunlight. Since none of the other images in this group have similar properties we believe the paper was not coated as thoroughly.

Pine: In the barn image some areas that have normally been white seem to have some of the color from surrounding dark areas. The color is not crisp but instead a blur, we are not sure whether this occurred during developing or in exposing. In this same image small dots of unexposed are in the midst of dark exposure exist. This time we believe that a lack of coating adequately is the cause. There is a much less light area in the river image. The distant bright area is smaller and much less distinguishable. There is a small brown dot in the upper left hand corner of the river image. We believe this is a particle that found its way into the deckle box. Anyway it adds a bit of contrast to a blue picture.

Conclusions

Original vs. Actual

The original concept that we came up with was to link two of the modules done in class. We intended on linking papermaking and photography, specifically black and white photography. Unfortunately, we were unable to accomplish the original plan; instead, we linked papermaking with alternative photography, specifically cyanotype. Due to a break down in communication, we were unaware that the equipment available to us was unable to produce black and white images with handmade paper. This one development forced us to change from enlargement photography to contact photography. We subsequently were forced to proceed with the computer area of the project. In hindsight, our current project is just as fun and informative. Mitchell and I also spent a day producing our eight sheets of paper until we found out about sizing. Sizing allows the paper to stay together even when saturated with water. This, of course, is required during the development process.

Conclusions on the Experiment

The light source made little difference on the production of the images. This is due to the fact that the sun was intense on the day of exposure. Of course if the sun was lower in the sky or obstructed by clouds a noticeable difference would have occurred. Differences between the paper were not so much in the image production, but more in the status of the paper after drying. The cotton seemed to bond with the sizing better and did not distort after drying. The pine, however, curled after drying. The images differ very little, we decided that the cotton was a better paper, for the texture reasons. Of course, the negative of the river image needed to have more contrast to be successful. The barn image was a great success and an amazing image mainly because of the contrast in the negative.

Links

www.sewanee.edu/chem/Chem%26Art/default.html

Nathan Bess and Thomas Stimpson's Site

Acknowledgements

We received help from the following people: Nathan Bess, Thomas Stimpson and Pradip Malde. We would also like to thank Dr. Bordley for allowing us to change the project around so much.